[haberman]

Just to add a few:

- They work offline, like native apps, but are cross-platform, like web apps.

- You can develop and distribute them without running your own server infrastructure (the Chrome store will distribute them and the run locally).

- They work on ChromeOS

[indubitably]

That’s a funny definition of cross-platform. You mean, it’s cross-platform if you use Google’s browser.

And as far as offline goes, that’s an active area of development within the HTML5 spec. It doesn’t strike me as a particular draw given that it’s at least possible, if still somewhat painful, to build truly cross-platform apps with offline capabilities.

Why should I support ChromeOS? ChromeOS is not the web!

[haberman]

Yeah, and Java apps are cross-platform if you use the JDK. It's cross-platform from an app developer's perspective because the runtime exists on multiple platforms. Pretty standard definition of "cross-platform."

I'm not telling you what you should do. I'm telling you why this model is attractive to me.

[jljljl]

Java is only cross platform if you use the JDK, Flash is only cross platform if you use Adobe's plugin, etc. So I don't think this is a completely funny definition of cross platform.

>>It doesn’t strike me as a particular draw given that it’s at least possible, if still somewhat painful, to build truly cross-platform apps with offline capabilities.

If you can achieve a cross platform experience using something that's installed on most PC's, and if it offers features or simplicity that is not available in the truly cross-platform spec, then that seems like a strong draw.

[zobzu]

TBH JDK has open, 3rd party implementations. I'm running one right now.

Chrome's API don't have this. Chrome == Chromium, and there's nothing else under the sun that either have it or want it.

HOWEVER - Chrome has the largest marketshare by far, thus enforcing whatever it wants. Knowing competitors will not pick up the functionality because "its really made just for Chrome, not for the open web", that's called "extinguishing" competitors. But I'm sure everyone is all too familiar with that concept.

[patrickaljord]

jdk is not open source, or wasn't at the time. So 3rd parties open implementations were required. Chrome through chromium is an open implementation by default and it's highly maintained, tested and optimized. Reimplementing it wouldn't make much sense and so would complaining about the lack of implementations.

[pcwalton]

> Reimplementing it wouldn't make much sense and so would complaining about the lack of implementations.

I do not think that Chromium represents the best possible implementation of the Web stack. Having multiple implementations of HTML and the various related specs is what has pushed them forward so rapidly.

[zobzu]

so you say we should ditch all browsers and only use chrome. my issue VERY exactly.

[coldtea]

>That’s a funny definition of cross-platform. You mean, it’s cross-platform if you use Google’s browser.

Cross platform just means they run in different platforms. Nothing in the notion depends on if they do so with native code or with some supporting layer (like the JVM, WxWidgets or Chrome).

>Why should I support ChromeOS? ChromeOS is not the web!

Why should you support ANYTHING for that matter? Including the web. If you want to do so, do it. If not, don't. You don't "have to".

[patrickaljord]

Chrome apps can also be compiled to cordova so chrome apps can run natively on iOS and Android too, no need for chrome. This was just announced at the chrome dev summit and a bit earlier at the cordova conf in Amsterdam.

[zobzu]

It's cross Google ;-) Croogle apps.